Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Bill Roache/Ken Barlow

Covered End
Covered End Posts: 52,254
in Not Sports Related
Has been found not guilty.
«13

Comments

  • eaststandmike
    eaststandmike Posts: 14,956
    Torpedo off the starboard bow"
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    Covered End said:

    Has been found not guilty.

    Beat you.


  • Kap10
    Kap10 Posts: 15,638
    I suspect the same for Dave Lee Travis too.
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,962
    Hopefully this will put a stop to the ridiculous witch hunt that has happened with operation YewTree .
  • BowieAddick
    BowieAddick Posts: 1,192
    edited February 2014
    Didn't this "ridiculous witch hunt" end up with Stuart Hall pleading guilty to sexual assault on a child of nine, amongst others.
  • DRF
    DRF Posts: 2,455
    Kap10 said:

    I suspect the same for Dave Lee Travis too.

    I'm not sure, Bill's defence has been 'I don't know these girls, I've never met them, no-on eever came into my dressing room.'

    Dave's seems to be 'It was different back then, girls loved it when you stuck your hand up their skirts, they are all right sorts phwoar.' Harder to get away with that defence.
  • Ormiston_Addick
    Ormiston_Addick Posts: 8,818
    DRF said:

    Kap10 said:

    I suspect the same for Dave Lee Travis too.

    I'm not sure, Bill's defence has been 'I don't know these girls, I've never met them, no-on eever came into my dressing room.'

    Dave's seems to be 'It was different back then, girls loved it when you stuck your hand up their skirts, they are all right sorts phwoar.' Harder to get away with that defence.
    PMSL, so true!
  • sadiejane1981
    sadiejane1981 Posts: 9,012
    Yes dave Travis seems to have a different, less redeeming attitude to it all. Obviously the prosecution couldn't prove that roache had ever met these girls otherwise he would have found to be lying, hopefully he can get his career back on track, corrie were waiting to see whether they needed to kill him off!
  • AFKABartram
    AFKABartram Posts: 58,139
    edited February 2014
    Such a grey area (literally grey and most involved now are pensioners).

    Other than for serious things such as war crimes, murder etc with proven evidence, I find it very hard to justify seeing people and their families dragged through the psychologically destroying criminal charge and court process for alleged events that happened 50 years earlier.

    There is also a degree of whether it is fair seeing someone tried for alleged offences in 1965 based on 2014 values. There is an incomparable difference in the moral and social acceptance level in those two periods.
  • PL54
    PL54 Posts: 10,757
    When do you think he'll get the formal apology?

  • Sponsored links:



  • Steve Dowman
    Steve Dowman Posts: 2,406
    why the feck did iut go to court with no proof he had even met them? That is ridiculous.
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    AFKABartram said:



    There is also a degree of whether it is fair seeing someone tried for alleged offences in 1965 based on 2014 values. There is an incomparable difference in the moral and social acceptance level in those two periods.

    Exactly. it's like someone being prosecuted today for being racist in the 70's!
  • Rizzo
    Rizzo Posts: 6,467
    If the jury agreed that the 'victims' had never even met the accused then surely they should, at the very least, be done for perjury?
  • Steve Dowman
    Steve Dowman Posts: 2,406
    i guess that there is no proof either way, so they wont be done for perjury.
  • sadiejane1981
    sadiejane1981 Posts: 9,012
    Steve Dowman said:

    why the feck did iut go to court with no proof he had even met them? That is ridiculous.

    They had to be seen to be taking them seriously.
  • Steve Dowman
    Steve Dowman Posts: 2,406
    why? if there is no evidence it should not go to court, whether they want to be seen to be doing something or not, it is not fair to drag someone through the dirt on the say so of someone with no proof who can remain anonymous.
  • Kap10
    Kap10 Posts: 15,638
    Steve Dowman said:

    why the feck did iut go to court with no proof he had even met them? That is ridiculous.

    I think the problem is that the whole momentum of the Saville blunders meant that mass hysteria has led to poorly worked through prosecutions.

    Regarding my comments re DLT, apologies, spoke without knowing anything about the two cases, so mine was an uniformed comment - sorry if any offence casued.
  • adamtheaddick
    adamtheaddick Posts: 8,664
    Just hope rolf gets found not guilty will be gutted he was my idol as a kid.

  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,254
    edited February 2014
    Not guilty is not guilty. But I believe there was no evidence, that I'm aware of & I don't see how he could be found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt.. Although, I still fail to understand why a number of women from seperate locations, would come forward.

    I reckon he was guilty, but it can't be proven. Just my opinion.

    Especially, after that interview he gave in New Zealand (I think), saying that victims brought it on themselves, because of something they had done in a previous life. (Or some such twaddle).
  • nth_london_addick
    nth_london_addick Posts: 35,919
    I feel sorry for women that get assaulted or raped as things like this only pour doubt upon the truth

  • Sponsored links:



  • sadiejane1981
    sadiejane1981 Posts: 9,012
    nth london addick said:

    I feel sorry for women that get assaulted or raped as things like this only pour doubt upon the truth

    And men!
  • Redrobo
    Redrobo Posts: 11,339
    adamtheaddick said:

    Just hope rolf gets found not guilty will be gutted he was my idol as a kid.

    Two litlle boys, two little toys, know what I mean, nudge, nudge, wink wink, say no more, say no more.


  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,716
    A conviction has to be "beyond reasonable doubt."

    Lapse of time may well have made this the only possible verdict.
  • eaststandmike
    eaststandmike Posts: 14,956
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26068034

    Reading some of the things on the link above are laughable, what a waste of public money.
  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 34,294
    edited February 2014
    Covered End said:

    Not guilty is not guilty. But I believe there was no evidence, that I'm aware of & I don't see how he could be found guilty. Although, I still fail to understand why a number of women from seperate locations, would come forward.

    .

    just listening to the Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 - someone stated that it could be that these women could now claim from the criminal injuries board & the compo amounts are listed on their website - £3k for non penetrative touching (double if it happened more than once) over £10k for penetrative invasion and over £20k if you are still disturbed by it.

    not saying that it never happened, but it seems no proof needed to claim - just a court case.
  • SELR_addicks
    SELR_addicks Posts: 15,612
    LenGlover said:

    A conviction has to be "beyond reasonable doubt."

    Lapse of time may well have made this the only possible verdict.

    Must be next-to-impossible, apart from a full confession, to prove something that happened 30 or 40 years ago. Timelines on the day would be basically unknown and there wouldn't be any DNA or other evidence available. Only their word against his.
  • nth_london_addick
    nth_london_addick Posts: 35,919
    Sorry sadie

    And men

    It just means less will come forward and less scum will be taken off the streets

    Those that accused him what happens now

    He was right in his statement outside court


    There are no winners
  • Goonerhater
    Goonerhater Posts: 12,677
    Obill and CPS stumbling from f__k up to farse to cover their arse.

    they didnt instigate charges of rape and assault so when they get found out they have to be SEEN to react. Hence all the charges --no matter how bogus going to court.

    As said the affects on women and kids coming forward is the biggest worry.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,458
    AFKABartram said:

    Such a grey area (literally grey and most involved now are pensioners).

    Other than for serious things such as war crimes, murder etc with proven evidence, I find it very hard to justify seeing people and their families dragged through the psychologically destroying criminal charge and court process for alleged events that happened 50 years earlier.

    There is also a degree of whether it is fair seeing someone tried for alleged offences in 1965 based on 2014 values. There is an incomparable difference in the moral and social acceptance level in those two periods.

    Here's my view:

    1. There are few crimes that rank as serious as some of the allegations made in a number of YewTree cases.
    2. There should be no time limit on bringing a prosecution in such cases - the defence of "well it was a long time ago" should always be treated with contempt
    3. Morally and socially we might be living in different times, but legally we are not. If it was illegal then, it should be tested in the law courts.

    *gets off high horse*

  • Redskin
    Redskin Posts: 3,132
    edited February 2014
    AFKABartram said:

    Such a grey area (literally grey and most involved now are pensioners).

    Other than for serious things such as war crimes, murder etc with proven evidence, I find it very hard to justify seeing people and their families dragged through the psychologically destroying criminal charge and court process for alleged events that happened 50 years earlier.

    There is also a degree of whether it is fair seeing someone tried for alleged offences in 1965 based on 2014 values. There is an incomparable difference in the moral and social acceptance level in those two periods.

    War crimes,murder etc - bad

    Sexual abuse of a girl/child - It was the 70s,it was different then.

    Jesus...

    Edit:just seen Chizz's far more eloquent and sober post...

Categories

“Marketplace”